Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#631

Post by kfrz » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 12:57 AM UTC

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #584

wmccullough wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're my hero! This attitude is why I quit regularly contributing to this site. Any time any single person does something positive, some armchair "expert" comes out the woodworks to tell you how it won't work or can't work.

What would you prefer? Rolling applause for every idea anyone presents? One benefit of criticism is we might get to read an angle of attack we hadn't thought of and thereby improve our ideas and designs. Sure, when people blow off an idea by saying "pointless, let's save the baby dolphins first" I don't find those comments helpful, but HN almost always has far more in-depth critiques. Edit: fixed a word

Compared to reddit, you're 100% on the money. At least here, I'm looking at the news/writings I'd be looking at elsewhere, but the discussion is much closer to humane than some things I've seen elsewhere on this internet.

We'll all in this game together, learning how to be a single mind. Be nice to your fellow human-cells no matter their goal, if their goal is for the greater good. The thing is - we can save the dolphins && live on Mars, not mutually exclusive goals.

If somebody told Elon "don't go Mars, do something like cure cancers first" what would he say? Thye're missing the point altogether, right? People are curing cancer, saving dolphins, working on hunger. The reason Musk is so successful and iconic is because specifically he followed things that interested and mattered to him, i.e. energy and colonization.

If someone is following their passion and investing enough energy to be recognized on the level of these people, they're assuredly more cognizant of what's in the realm of reality in their scope than the average journalist/internet commentator. I can glean so much from just listening to the man react to the audience's question.. the one about the Funny or Die video, he's sending "you're wasting our time" body language... I get it, though, this is a pointed, focused thing they're working on; grandiose and monumental indeed, focused nonetheless.

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#632

Post by zik » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 12:59 AM UTC

callmeatroll wrote: post #629

This is either: A) the most revolutionary venture of this century B) the largest Ponzi scheme ever

Not sure how it could be seen as a Ponzi scheme. By definition a Ponzi scheme has to return money from its later investors to earlier investors and I don't see anything like that here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#633

Post by encoderer » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 12:59 AM UTC

cwkoss wrote: post #622

encoderer wrote: post #615

I expect the "no children" rule to apply for roughly 9.25 months. What then I wonder?

What is the "no children" rule? (Didn't watch the whole video)

No children bc you must be willing and able to face death.

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#634

Post by nothis » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 1:00 AM UTC

a_thro_away wrote: post #138

artursapek wrote: post #13

God, my lifetime would be so boring if it wasn't for people like Elon.

OMG; he says is going to build it, exactly like his demo. As a youth I received a brand new Matt Mason for birthday; it has been a very, very long time.

Oh, wow! I put the video in my watch-later-list, until then: What's the time frame, roughly? Are we talking 5 years or 20?

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#635

Post by mikeash » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 1:03 AM UTC

nixos wrote: post #628

mikeash wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was completely up front about how early they are in this project. He even acknowledged his overambitious timelines, saying that the one he presented was the most optimistic and probably wouldn't happen. I can't understand how this kind of openness gets labeled "a reality-distortion field."

I don't know, probably it's the blender videos pushing the wider internet audience into it (so it's not all his fault). While he's going good, and is launching rockets, but right now he's behind OldSpace in doing what he's actually doing - launching rockets.

Behind on things like launching on time and not exploding, ahead on things like recovering hardware and being cheap.

In any case, it's not like he infused the whole thing with a "we are the best at space" attitude, so why does that even matter?

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#636

Post by wwarner » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 1:04 AM UTC

I'm skeptical for two reasons. Living on Mars won't be like living in California at all. And two, building a colony there will be very, very, even catastrophically costly, so yes it will hurt everyone else who chooses not to participate. There are only so many platinum mines. Resources should be focused here. Think about it: how much water and air have left Earth to date? A miniscule amount, all due to space exploration. This project would change that, and for the worse.

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#637

Post by carleverett » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 1:04 AM UTC

erikpukinskis wrote: post #624

MaxfordAndSons wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, Musk himself is very upfront about the risks involved, especially for the first few waves of colonists. And indeed, there would likely be very little personal upside for them, even if they survived the grueling initial period. But you're making a false equivocation: considering the colonists personal risks in leaving against the species shared risk in staying. If there's even a small chance of success in esta…

> If there's even a small chance of success in establishing a self-sustaining colony [...] then any degree of personal risks levied on individual colonists are "worth it" from the species level No, the risk v reward curve has to be better than an equivalent risk v reward curve for a terrestrial species survival project to justify the mission. I would argue that just about any PhD in epidemiology, disaster relief, or…

> The choice is a two-planet species versus a more prepared one-planet species.

That's not the choice. Those two options are not mutually exclusive.

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#638

Post by smb06 » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 1:05 AM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #148

Some of the comments here make me think of crabs in a pot pulling down the ones who try to climb out. Nobody's making you participate in this venture. If you don't like it, then you're free to go do whatever it is you do like. You might think Musk could better direct his efforts and resources elsewhere, but most other billionaires don't do anything all that interesting, they just invest their money in mundane stuff,…

Humanity would not have achieved much if we didn't try something because it was either expensive and/or risky.

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#639

Post by erikpukinskis » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 1:10 AM UTC

dguest wrote: post #545

ythl wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in my case, I see trying to start a Mars colony as a death trap. It's the illusion of carrying on the human race, but it's really just dooming a bunch of pioneers to a grim fate in an extremely hostile environment. I think making a south pole colony would be hard enough, let alone a Mars one.

You say a south pole colony would be hard enough as though we don't have one. We have a south pole colony [0], and there are a half dozen multi-million dollar experiments there that must be manned year round. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amundsen–Scott_South_Pole_Stat...

I believe under discussion is a self-sustaining colony. The south pole runs on imports.

Re: Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species [video]

#640

Post by nickff » Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 1:10 AM UTC

justrossthings wrote: post #616

nickff wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having read the trilogy (as well as "2312"), I must agree that it was poorly written, with some very poorly constructed characters. Having said that, and despite my distaste for and disagreement about the political outcomes, the technical vision was very interesting.

Any recommendations? I am about to finish Red Mars

In terms of expansive universes, I would recommend the "Revelation Space" series, though it is much higher-level than the Mars trilogy. I am also a big fan of the action-oriented "Expanse" series (by James S.A. Corey), as well as the crowd favorites: "The Martian" and the "Foundation" series.